Woman without arms files discrimination complaint against Universal Orlando | WFTV
This is just ridiculous.
This is just ridiculous.
Woman without arms files Complaint against Universal
- Thread starter Scott W.
- Start date
-
Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
We must recall the poor guy with no legs that was seated in a steel coaster and how that turned out.
A podcast I listen to mentioned this week how the poor family who lost their son in the Disney gator attack has declined to sue. Yet frivolous lawsuits (not unlike this one) continue to waste everyone's time. Sad.
- Sep 18, 2015
- 1,706
- 1,335
Quite frankly It would seem pretty ridiculous for EVERY ride in universal to have that policy. If that really is the case, then it's a stupid policy and an oversight by universal and shes probably going to win something.
- Mar 30, 2015
- 3,663
- 6,366
Guess it's time for me to sue for Forbidde Journey's seats being too small for me...
- Sep 23, 2013
- 4,160
- 3,765
- Sep 18, 2015
- 1,706
- 1,335
- Apr 18, 2013
- 3,451
- 3,384
Yeah I can certainly understand roller coasters and rides where the restraints are designed to make use of the riders arms to keep them in the vehicle, but what about something like Hogwarts Express?
I really hope she doesn't win anything. Her lawyer is insane saying they shouldn't make a rule based on appearance of disability. She is basically asking the park ride attendants to make an assessment on each rider with missing arms?
- May 26, 2012
- 1,941
- 2,682
It is the standard policy. Even something like the Hogwarts Express... supposed it lurched to a stop. She could be unable to brace herself, fall and be seriously inured. (And I'm sure she'd sue then too). We called it HUGS - Head remain upright, maintain an upright position, grasp with one extremity (it can be a prosthesis, and able to sustain the motion of the ride. And while she may think she's superwoman, you do it for her and then you'd have to do it for all (otherwise that would indeed by discriminating). All it would take is ONE accident and the park would be in hot water. Now the HE CAN make an exception, but it would require approval from a lead or supervisor.
Last edited:
- May 26, 2012
- 1,941
- 2,682
As I replied, if the train came to a sudden stop, she'd be unable to brace herself and could be seriously injured.
- Apr 18, 2013
- 3,451
- 3,384
By that standard I supposed she should basically be banned from every form of public transportation as well. What exactly are you supposed to grasp onto on the HE anyways?
I'm by no means a fan of frivolous lawsuits, however the issue that does stand out somewhat to me is this policy being kind of lazily applied to everyone and every attraction.
- May 26, 2012
- 1,941
- 2,682
Public transport is a lot different than a theme park ride. On the HE exceptions can be made because of the gentle nature of the ride. But that would literally be the only one. You can check on the online guide. It states being able to grasp in the very beginning of the book, but its not listed as such on the individual ride listing. Every other ride requires being able to hold on, and if no legs, the portion of the remaining legs must reach out over the seat.
She had no problem with most Disney rides because they are generally slow and Disney sets their own rules. Most of Universal's rides are a little more intense and when the ride manufacturer sets rules, the operator is supposed to follow them. B&M coasters especially are known for their safety record and part of that is that they have very strict rules about people without use of arms or legs not riding.
BTW, here's the story about the guy with no legs: Darien Lake: Iraq war veteran James Hackemer dies in roller coaster fall | Daily Mail Online
BTW, here's the story about the guy with no legs: Darien Lake: Iraq war veteran James Hackemer dies in roller coaster fall | Daily Mail Online
- Apr 18, 2013
- 3,451
- 3,384
Yeah I don't see any issue with her riding anything that doesn't have any kind of upper body restraint. Kong, Spider-Man, Cat in the Hat, and other rides like that shouldn't be an issue.
Like I said previously I don't like frivolous lawsuits like this, but this is one thing that is a little annoying in that all the parks have very inconsistent rules even with similar rides. Obviously safety is most important, but at the same time people shouldn't be turned away from rides without any real logical explanation backing it up.
I think there's a possibility this whole thing was set up, but if not I can understand her frustration. I talked about this in another thread but I went to Knott's Berry farm once and discovered I wasn't allowed to ride any roller coasters due to wearing glasses, it was very disappointing to discover I couldn't ride the majority of stuff I was looking forward to even though it was similar to rides I was accustomed to riding. It's very hard to respect rules that just don't seem grounded in any logical reason and then that in turn causes you to question the safety in general. Do they really know what's safe and not safe or are they just taking the approach of applying heavy handed rules since they're really not sure and hope that they eliminate any possibility of anything happening without having to really take a hard look at what the ride does and what's really needed.
Like I said previously I don't like frivolous lawsuits like this, but this is one thing that is a little annoying in that all the parks have very inconsistent rules even with similar rides. Obviously safety is most important, but at the same time people shouldn't be turned away from rides without any real logical explanation backing it up.
I think there's a possibility this whole thing was set up, but if not I can understand her frustration. I talked about this in another thread but I went to Knott's Berry farm once and discovered I wasn't allowed to ride any roller coasters due to wearing glasses, it was very disappointing to discover I couldn't ride the majority of stuff I was looking forward to even though it was similar to rides I was accustomed to riding. It's very hard to respect rules that just don't seem grounded in any logical reason and then that in turn causes you to question the safety in general. Do they really know what's safe and not safe or are they just taking the approach of applying heavy handed rules since they're really not sure and hope that they eliminate any possibility of anything happening without having to really take a hard look at what the ride does and what's really needed.
- Sep 18, 2015
- 1,706
- 1,335
No they should follow what they are trained to do. That's why universal is getting sued and not employees. If Universal screws up and sets a bad policy that is their fault.
I cam pretty much guarantee Cedar Point and Busch Gardens do not have this policy for EVERY SINGLE RIDE, although I know they have a lot of restrictions, and as we said Disney does not have these blanket rules. The bottom line is that it really doesn't matter how frivolous the lawsuit is or if you think this is the right policy. If universal lazily set a blanket policy that is proven to be unreasonable and beyond what is required, then they just got caught with their pants down. They should know better.
I could definitely believe this was a setup though.
